Experimentation, OR, and related flaws

So, looking for how other people would rule this so I can see discussion and make up my mind on final house rule.

Experimenting for Original Research allows you to modify your experimentation roll in an attempt to make a discovery. (I'm not going to go into the unclarity in its explanations here.)
The two experimentation-related flaws - Creative Block and Exciting Experimentation (magi of hermes p26) both require you roll twice. The question is: Can you chose to modify the experiment roll by different amounts for each roll?
If I roll an eight and a six, can I choose to roll the +2 on the eight (for 10, discovery!) and only +1 for the second roll (because +2 would be 8, complete failure).

1 Like

After rereading the relevant rules text I do not believe any RAW exists.

Exciting Experimentation is "roll twice, the storyguide picks one", so I'd allow you to modify them separately as you please and have the storyguide pick from either of the two outcomes you selected.

Creative Block is, as near as I can tell, "roll twice and suffer both of them", so I'd say use the same modifier for both. (Mostly because if you allow separate modifiers this becomes a fairly competitive Virtue for OR-focused characters.)

I have absolutely no idea what the author intent was.

1 Like

Hummm, Creative Block is interesting in that it applies two rolls from the experimentation table. That could actually be abused to increase the chance of success with OR. Even outside of OR, you can get some outlandish effects because both rolls are applied. In effect it gives you an initial roll of 12+ every time you experiment.

You example of two rolls with a different modifier does not work well for Exciting Experimentation. Only one of the results is kept. If one of the modified rolls is a 10 for OR, choosing the other one would be punishing the player for having a virtue. Actually for any activity in which one of the results was a 10, not choosing it would be punishing the player since you are costing them XP.

I would lean towards both virtues using a single selected modifier for the rolls.

EDIT: As Cyborg points out, I completely misread Exciting Experimentation and for some reason thought it was a Virtue.

Uh, no, it would be punishing the player for having a flaw.

My bad, I misread that.

In that case there is no way I would support applying a different modifier to each of the two rolls.

The text of Exciting Experimentation says that the "more amusing" one should be used. The non-"Discovery" roll would have to be a whopper to be taken over a discovery while doing OR.

I would (as a SG) take "Side Effect" over "Discovery" eeeeevery time.

But, yeah, as a general policy same modifier seems the more reasonable approach.

1 Like

Until it happens three times in a row and the player rage quits the game. "More amusing" would generally be read as more amusing to the group. Dice can be an unforgiving mistress and never letting a player advance in a character goal is a sure way to make them unhappy to the point they will make the other players unhappy.

In general though, people with ether of those Flaws should normally not make an OR as a primary character goal. They just are not setup for it.


I would say allow each to have a separate modifier, at least for exciting experimentation, since that is the only way a player can be sure of ever having a discovery- if both rolls land within rand to get a double discovery then they are making progress towards a breakthrough. Having the same modifier makes sense for creative block, for exactly the same reason- it prevents the player from bending bot rolls to the same effect, since both will occur.

1 Like